Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment So...did WPPSI...on to Stanford Binet-LM

I always thought of the Flynn effect as applying across generations. I think it's an interesting idea that culture is changing and information exposure increasing quickly enough that a person would see a noticeable change within their own lifetime, vs. age peers from their more mature age but an earlier time period. I guess the reason that descriptions of the effect may mention people born at different times is the implied notion that cultural enrichment of intelligence works best during early formative periods, but research seems to suggest a certain amount of plasticity of intelligence during later years as well.

Are they asking you to PAY for the LM? I would frankly be shocked by that in this day and age. GDC has done a lot of good for a lot of families, but they just love that LM, which I can not understand. If they want to run an LM 'for free' 'just to see' that's one thing, but I can't believe that anyone would charge real money for this test when SB-V is available.

They are Professionals, and I'm just a Mom, so what do I know? ((shrugs))

I'd be a little afraid that a Lm would mess with my head. If the score is 170 or higher, how in the world are you not going to feel very very isolated? When really, you might have a kid who is in great company with 145-scoring kids in DYS.

((shrugs))
Grinity
Grinity

That's interesting and I guess that I hadn't thought of it that way lol! The reason I'm saying that one person, within his lifetime, would see changes due to the Flynn Effect using an outdated test is b/c, when they renorm tests, the norming pool often sees a drop in scores with the newer version of the test. For instance, the GDC's own website says that,


Given the probable drop in PRI and VCI on the WISC-IV for this group, it isn't just the addition of more tests in the areas that are poorer indicators of giftedness (PSI, WMI) that depressed the scores of these kids who were 130+ before. I take that as the Flynn Effect at work.

In a psychological testing & assessment course I took a few years back at our local university, when we were on the subject of IQ scores, the book and the professor also both stated that, toward the end of an IQ test's lifespan, one would achieve higher scores. So, the prof's suggestion was that, if one was looking for the highest scores one could get, one should take an IQ test that was about to be renormed (such as the WISC-IV or the WPPSI-III would be right now). Once they are renormed, the same child is likely to get a lower score on the new test.

So, for instance, if I tested one of the my kids right now on the WISC-IV or waited until next year and tested her on the WISC-V, presumably she'd be of about the same ability one year apart, but she'd get a higher # this year using the older test. This article deals with the other end of the bell curve, but discusses the same thing: http://behaviorhealth.org/measures_taken_to_compensate_for%20iq.htm

Oh, and I should jump in to agree with Dottie. My last post was more about IQ tests in general and not to say that the scores your ds got on the WPPSI are inflated. If he hit the ceiling on multiple parts, even if the test is at the end of its life cycle, I do believe that you can safely say that your dc is very, very intelligent. I'd just be less comfortable with the SB-LM b/c it is much more outdated than the WPPSI-III and, in that instance, I do think that you can wind up with numbers that are significantly less meaningful and informative.

OK. I am starting to get it....:-) Thanks all! So according to that link he would be right at the cusp of HG/EG on the WPPSI.

All the 3 sub tests where he hit the ceiling was in the verbal category.

All the other scores with the exception of 2 were 17 with one 16.
He had two 10's in the vision detail section. She is suspecting a vision issue possibly.

I have no idea what to expect today.

Grinity, I agree with you. I could mess with your head. I am taking this with a grain of salt. I know my kid and I hope that I know what he needs...:-)A number is just a number. I doubt that we will see crazy extreme results today. He is very smart but still social and seem to adapt to new situations and gets along with peers.

Actually all this being said...I have no idea.

Since he is so strong verbally I don't know what that would do to the score.

Great info and thoughts everyone!

EDIT.

Dottie, thank you. It is still the same child. They did the WJ
achievement although I have not seen that report yet. She did say he scored at 2nd to 3rd grade.

IQ set apart. The most remarkable thing with my son is his EXTREME DRIVE TO LEARN! It is INSANE really. He will not stop! All self driven.

I'm sure that they'll give you the full breakdown with the report you get, but the number you have right now might not be telling you the whole story. My dd13 took that WJ-III and WISC-IV when she was 7 and, while she scored around 5th grade overall on the WJ, she had wild variation within it. She really isn't a 2e kid. Some of it was due to lack of exposure, some of it due to perfectionism, and some of it represented real strengths and weaknesses. As I recall, she was at grade 18+ on writing and maybe another part related to language arts. She was barely at grade level on one part related to timed math facts or something like that. Honestly, I don't think that she was really functioning at a postgrad level anywhere at that age, but overall those are her strengths and weaknesses seven and a half years later. She's a superb reader and writer and pretty average in things related to speed. Math is strong, but not HG+ by any means (more MG).

This is wonderful, and any efforts you make to set up his environment so that this can continue will be worthwhile. I don't think that there is any child who shows their drive to learn quite like they did as a preschooler once they grow up. But you want to see it glimmer from within once and a while.

Good luck with today's discussion.
Grinity

I think this and the capacity to focus is far more important that any score at 4. A child very driven to learn tends to learn and so becomes more unusual over time.

I don't think the Flynn effect is required to explain why norms from 1972 are no longer relevant. The scores produced are compared to children in the 1970s, but they are being used to describe a child in 2012 who grew up in a drastically different world. There are vast differences in culture, in exposure, in TV access and cable programming, in how preschool is the new K, etc. It's not valid to compare what a child knows in 2012 to what a child knew in 1972 and that's what the score will do.

OK, so he did the testing. Don't know anything yet but we go in for the conference in a couple of hours. She did, however, give me the Achievement scores and seemed to be pretty amazed.
DS age is 4 years 8 months. All scores are in the 99.9% except two that are 99.7%.

BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT: SS 180, AE 9-5,
BROAD READING: SS 141, AE 8-8, GE 3.3
BROAD MATH: SS 171, AE 8-10, GE 3.5

BRIEF READING: SS 185, AE 8-5, GE 3.1
BRIEF MATH: SS 164, AE 8-9, GE 3.4
MATH CALC SKILLS: SS 145, AE 9-0
BRIEF WRITING: SS 167, AE 9-7, GE 4.2

ACADEMIC SKILLS: SS 179, AE 9-6
ACADEMIC APPS: SS 170, AE 7-11

Letter-Word Identification: SS 175, AE 9-3, GE 3.9
Reading Fluency: SS 178, AE 10-3, GE 4.9
Calculation: SS 148, AE 8-10, GE 3.5
Math Fluency: SS 148, AE 9-7, GE 4.2
Spelling: SS 172, AE 11-4, GE 5.9
Passage comprehension: SS 142, AE 7-4, GE 2.0
Applied Problems: SS 161, AE 8-7, GE 3.3
Writing samples: SS 158, AE 7-10, GE 2.5

Thoughts about all this??